Author . 




Title. 



■i ** s 



Book ....0.4=._ 



Imprint. 



W — IT3n-I 



m 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

JUL 2 6 1933 



689 



^UTOM^TIC SHOTaXJN^ 



Committee on the Territories, 

House of Eepresentatives, 

Thursday, March "29, 1906. 
The committee met at 10.30 o'clock a. m.. Hon. Edward L. Hamil- 
ton (chairman) in the chair. 

The Chairjian. The meeting of the committee was called this 
morning for a hearing on House bill 119-19, known as the automatic- 
gun bill. Are any gentlemen here ready to address the committee in 
favor of the bill ? ■ 

STATEMENT OF MR. G. 0. SHIELDS, PRESIDENT OF THE LEAGUE 
OF AMERICAN SPORTSMEN AND SPECIAL AGENT OF THE NEW 
YORK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY. 

Mr. Shields. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen. I come here to plead 
the cause of the birds and the wikl animals. I am not here to speak 

r any business or personal interest in this, but we are here to ask 

ill to enact a law for the protection of the birds and wild animals. 

Mr. Lr,i'>-r>. Before you proceed, give your name, residence, and 
< ;...,.,. lion, and why you are here. 

Mr. Shields. I am president of the League of American Sports- 
men, and I live in New York City. 

Mr. Lloyd. You are here in the interests of that league ? 

Mr. Shields. In the interest of the League of American Sports- 
men and of a number of other bodies, whose names will appear as we 
progress, in docuiucntarv evidence. I want to make a personal ex- 
planation in this connection. I want to tell vou gentlemen that I 
have been devoting iiearlv all my life to the work of game preserva- 
tien. I am on record in 1878 as having petitioned the Ohio legisla- 
ture to enact ajaw to protect the wild pigeon, and I am on record as 
far liack as 1872 as trying to get Congress to enact a law to protect 
tlic 1)1 1 Halo. I have been working in the interest of these various 
species of wild animals and birds from 1865, from the time I came out 
of the Army in the civil war, up to to-day. Of course, in the mean- 
time I have had to make my living as I went along, but I have been in 
this work in the interests of wild animals and birds for nothing; have 
never got a cent of salary out of it ; have paid my own expenses all 
the time, and have put in the work of the League of American Sports- 
men $15,000 of my own monev. That is my record in this matter, 
briefly. 

I am accused by certain gun people— I will not say whom— of doing 
this work against the automatic shotgun from malicious motives. It 
lias I)een said ; and I have letters on file that have beer "'-itten to cer- 
tain people, trying to oppose this automatic-gu'- -arious 
places, to the effect that I aiu doing this becaus<^ rs and 



o9U (,\ 

2 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. -* kH\ t" 

ammunition makers withdrew their advertising from Recreatio: 
JNIagazine, whicli I published up to a year ago. If any of you ar 
interested in knowing tlie facts about tliat, 1 liave a copy of tha 
magazine here containing the advertisements of tlie ITnion Metalli 
Cartridge Company, the Winchester Arms Company, and tlie Rem 
ington Arms Company, the people who are opposing us to-day in ou, 
effort to secure laws to prohibit the use of this automatic gun. The;; 
are all directly or indirectly interested in the measure which is nov 
before you. 

This magazine contains half-page advertisements of those thr& 
corporations and of a number of others in the gun and amniunitioi 
business. That issue also contains a severe criticism, a severe arraign 
ment, of the so-called " pump gun," the repeating shotgun, whicl 
hres six shots in ten seconds, and perhajDS in less than that. 

I inaugurated in that issue a very strenuous crusade against tha 
weai^on, and I have been fighting it from that day to this. I liav 
been making rapid progress, as will apj^ear lure from documents, ii, 
creating public sentiment against the use of these murderous weapons 
i:ot only the automatic shotgun, bat the repeating shotgun as well. ^ 
have all this time been conducting a crusade against the reckles 
slaughter of game with any weapon, whatever it may be, and havi 
been iirging the enactment of laws to prohibit the sale of game; t( 
prohibit the shipment of game from one State to another; to linii 
the number of birds which a man may kill in a day ; and I think yoi 
all know that great progress has been made on all those lines. Al 
the States have enacted laws looking to the i^reservation of thei 
game, and some of them more stringent and drastic laws than otherj 
The sentiment of the ])eo]de of the United States, and of C; M,la J 
well, is to-dav rapidlv crystallizing in the direction of giving to tliJ 
wild animals' and liirils of this countrv every possible show for thei 
existence and of limiting the time of killing them and the number o 
those that mav be killed. These tilings must be done, or m a tev 
years there will be no game left in this countrv for anybody to hunt 

We can easilv see that the time is not far distant when the onl. 
living wild animals and birds will be those on preserves, eithe 
public or private, and such game as may overflow on to the surround 
ing territory. These are the conditions as you will tind them, tlios 
of you who" live ten or twenty years from now. Every State m thi 
Union is spendino- monev on its o-ame. The gun and aimnunitio' 
people— I sav this without any unfriendly feeling— are placing o 
the market all the time guns some of which are very cheap, other 
very expensive and beautiful, which naturally create i"/ ^?, ™".^' ' 
the" man who has one of them an anxiety to go out and kill tlung 
Ammunition is being made and sold at a rate that is simply alarmmj.- 

In this connection I want to read you an extract from a lettt 
from William T. Hornadav. of the New York Zoological Societ. 
one of the most conscientious men in the world: a man ^vno ne\( 
goes at anything carelessly; a man famous as a student o1:jJ:aii' 
protection "and of nature. He wrote this letter to Representatn 
Lacey a. few days ago: it is dated March 24. Mr. Lacey handed 
To me this morning. It relates to the measure that is under conside 
adon by Con^-ss to enact a law to protect migratory wild fow 
An opiiLn I- ■ - requested of the Attorney-General as to wheth. 
Congress haj ,, to do that. , . 



AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 3 

This letter reads as follows : 

New York Zoological Park, 

\cic York, March 2-'f, 1906. 
Hon. John F. Lacey, 

House of Rritrcsciitdiires. Wasliingtoii. O. ('. 

-My Dear Mr. Lacey : I am delighted to know tliiit tin- two same preservii- 
tlon measures in which we are interested are in such favornlilc cundition, and I 
beg you to accept through nie the thanlis of the zoolo,i;ii"il society for your 
ai)i)ear;ince l)eforc the Committee on Agriculture in recomnicndatidii of the fence 
appropriation for the buffalo herd. The item seems in a fair way now to go 
through. If it does it will meau the consiuumation this year of a proposition 
in which a great many Americans are interested. 

In offering a buffalo herd to the National Government as a gift the zoological 
society seeks to demonstrate the interest of private individuals in the fate of 
our most couspicuons American quadruped. We feel that it is the duty of 
individuals to do somctliiii^' tnward the establishment of the series of buffalo 
herds that should be I'st.iblislird very soon. 

It is very gratifying to kmiw that the game-refuge bill is in a fair way to 
become a law. 

We earnestly hope that the opinion of the Attorney-General in regard to the 
constitutionality of a migratory wild-fowl act against spring shooting will be 
as all wish it to be. In view of llic enormous annual outlay for firearms to be 
used agaiUcSt game birds it is impossililo (o have too much legislation in behalf 
of the birds. I have recently been assured by a gun inventor and manufacturer, 
who has every opportunity for obtaining information, that e\ery year there are 
sold in this country about 500.000 shotguns, of which about 3.50,000 cost $.5 or 
less. He also stated that in his opinion there are now in use in this coimtry 
about 10,000,000 shotguns, in which about 1,000.000.000 cartridges are used 
every year. Of these 700,000.000 are manufactured in the factories and the 
number is therefore well known. The other .300.000,000 are shells that are 
reloaded. 

In view of these figures, is it then possible tor laws for the protection of bird 
life to be too numerous or too stringent? Tlie outlook for twenty years hence 
really is appalling. 

Yours, very truly. W. T. Hornaday", Director. 

Mr. Hornaday is the author of the best natural history that has 
ever been written of American wild animals and birds. 

The New York Zoological Society, at its annual meeting last Jan- 
uary, passed this resolution : 

Resolved, That the New York Zoological Society condemns the use of the 
automatic shotgun as unsportsmanlike and highly destructive to bird life, and 
that the society urges on the legislature of this State the passage of a law pro- 
hibiting is use. 

The Camp Fire Club, of New York City, at its last meeting pre- 
ceding January IT, 190<i, the date of this letter, adopted the following 
resolution : 

Resolved. That this association emphatically condemns and protests against 
the introduction and use of the so-called automatic shotgun in the hunting of 
birds or other game, and w-e respectfully request the New York legislatiire to 
enact a law prohibiting the use of such weapon for such purpose. 

The New York Association for the Protection of Fish and Game 
is one of the oldest game protective associations in the United States 
and niunbers among its members such men as Grover Cleveland, Hon. 
Perrv Belmont, Hon. Warner Miller, Hon. Robert B. Eoosevelt, 
William P. Clyde. J. Coleman Drayton, Charles R. Flint, Gen. J. 
Fred Pierson, Gen. Warren M. Healv, and F. Augusttis Schermer- 



4 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 

horn. At its meeting October 13, 1905, this resolution was unani- 
mously adopted : 

Resolved. That this association emphatically condemns and protests against 
the introduction and use of the so-called automatic shotgun in the hunting of 
hirds or other game, and we respectfully request the Xew York legislature to 
enact a law prohibiting the use of such weapon for such purpose. 

I have also a letter from the secretar_y of the Boone and Crockett 
Club, of New York. I think all of you know of that club, and per- 
haps some of you are members of it. Its membership is limited to 
100 and is full, and it has a large waiting list. The Boone and 
Crockett Club, at its annual meeting held in New York City, Janu- 
ary 13, 19GG, passed the following resolution : 

Resolved. That the Boone and Crockett Club hereby condemns the use of the 
automatic shotgun in the hunting of birds and other game as contrary to the 
ethics of good sportsmanship, and requests its officers and executive committee 
to endeavor to have its use prohibited by law in the State of New York and 
elsewhere. 

I have here also a letter from Mr, J, Bissell Speer. secretary and 
treasurer of the Lewis and Clark Clul), of Pittsburg, Pa., a society 
whose object is the protection of fish and game, whose memljership 
list is full, which has anx)ng its memliership many men of national 
and even international reputation. He writes me under date of 
January 19, 1906, as follows: 

It afCords me pleasure to state that at its last meeting the Lewis and Clark 
Club unanimously adopted the following resolution condemning the use of the 
automatic gun : 

" Resolved, That this association emphatically condemns and protests against 
the introduction and use of the so-called automatic shotgun in the hunting of 
birds or other game, and we respectfully request our legislature to enact a law 
prohibiting the use of such weapon for such purposes." 

Of the 45 men present, not one raised a dissenting voice. The Lewis and 
Clark Club Is a unit in opposing the use of this gun, so far as I am able to learn. 

- The National Association of Audubon Societies includes 35 State 
associations, with an aggregate membership ox some 50.000 men and 
women, all of whom are bird lovers and bird students. This associa- 
tion pas.sed a resolution in substantially the same language as those 
which I have read, I will not take up your time to read that. 

Here is a communication from the Women's Pennsylvania Society 
for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, dated Philadelphia. Feb- 
ruary 10, 1906, which reads: 

To the officers of the New York Zoological Society. 

Gentlemen : At a stated meeting of the board of managers of the Women's 
Pennsylvania Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, held on the 9th 
ultimo, a motion was made and carried : 

" That this society send ,^25 to the New York Zoological Society, to be used 
in the war which it is now waging against the automatic shotgun." 

Furthermore, the following resolution was unanimously passed : 

" Resolved. That this association emphatically condemns and protests against 
the inti'oduction and use of the so-called automatic shotgun in the hunting of 
birds or other game, and respectfully requests the Pennsylvania legislature to 
enact a law prohibiting the use of such weapon for such purpose." 

I have here also a letter signed by William Dutcher. president of the 
National Association of Audubon Societies, which, as I say. has done 
an immense amount of work in the direction of obtaining leaislation 



6( 

AUTOMATTC SHOTGUN. 



PS 



for the purpose of protecting- animals and birds, addressed to Mr. 
William T. Hornadav. in which he says: 

My Dear Mb. Horxaday : It is with much surprise that I learn through your 
<-ommunicatiou of eveu»date that certain persons are claiming that the National 
Association of Audubon Societies for the Protection of Wild Animals and Birds 
is in favor of the use of automatic or pump guns and consequently is not in 
favor the passage of laws to prevent the use or sale of such firearms. 

The statement was made publicly that the secretary of this asso- 
ciation had declared himself opposed to any expression or legislation 
against the automatic gun. [Reading:] 

I lieg officially to state that the National Association of Audubon Societies is 
absolvitely opposed to either the manufacture, sale, or use of such firearms, and 
thei-efore hopes that the meritorious bill introdnced liy the New York Zoological 
Society will become a law. 

This bill prohibiting the use of the automatic gun was introduced 
into this Congress and into the legislatures of a dozen States at the 
instance of the New York Zoological Society and the Audubon so- 
cieties. Mr. Uutcher continues: 

1 beg further to add that any stateiiu'iit cuutrary to the above in effect 
is unauthorized. 

This society is working for the preservation of the wild birds and game of 
North -Vmeriea, and it sincerely should not stulllfy itself by advocating the use 
of one of the most potent means of destruction that has ever been devised. 
Ton are at lilierty to use this comnnmication either publicly or privately. 
1 am. very sincerely, yours, 

V>'iLLiAM DuTCHER, President. 

I have before me the rej^ort of the Ontario game commission for 
the year 1905, in which, in regard to automatic guns, the commission 
made this recommendation : 

Both last year and the year befoi'e the board recommended that the use of 
these guns be forbidden, and legislation was introduced last year for that pur- 
pose. A most A'igorous lobby was, however, conducted in the interest of the 
manufacturers against the bill, which was ultimately killed. 

Mr. Powers. Has any State as yet passed a bill prohibiting the use 
of this gun ? 

]Mr. Shields. Xo. sir: and I Avill explain briefly that the bill was 
introduced last year in about four or five States and got on the 
calendar in one State only. In the others it was killed in committee 
by the manufacturers of the gun and others in interest. 

Mr. HiGGiNS. Has this bill ever been introduced into the Territorial 
legislatures of New Mexico and Arizona, or has any similar bill been 
introduced ? 

Mr. Shields. I think it was in one of them, but I am not sui'e of 
that. 

Mr. HiGGiNS. Has it ever been considered by the Oklahoma Terri- 
torial legislature? 

Mr. Shields. I do not know about that. If it has somebody here 
will probably know of it. Last year it was considered in Pennsyl- 
vania, Xew Jersey, Arkansas, and Kentucky. Those are the only 
States I know of. 

Mr. HiGGiNS. But it ^^■as not enacted into law in anv of those 
States? 

Mr. Shields. Xo. sir; it was killed by the manufacturers of the gun 
in committee. In fact, thev say so ; and there is no doubt about it. 



6 AUTOMATIC SHOTGLTN. 

The Chairman. How did they do that? 

Mr. Shields. By g"oino: there and teUing the members of these com- 
mittees that the use of this gun shoukl not be prohibited. I was un- 
able to attend any of these n'leetings for good anc^ sutficient reasons. 

The Chairjian. They had public hearings before these State com- 
mittees, had they ? 

Mr. Shields. Yes, sir; 1)ut the burden of organizing delegations to 
go to the meetings would have fallen on me. I have said in the out- 
set that I have been doing everything I could. 

Mr. Moon. Your purpose is to protect the game? 

Mr. Shields. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moon. Do you not think it is better to make a short season, 
and designate in each season the kind of game that should be killed, 
and how much each man may kill? 

Mr. Shields. These things are being done and have been done for 
years past, and I have been largely instrumental in securing such 
laws. These things have all been done. They are merely steps in 
the right direction. 

Mr. Moon. ^Yhat difference does it make to the bird what kind of 
gun he is killed with, if there are only so many of them to be killed? 

Mr. Shields. I will come to that directly. 

The Chairman. Are you familiar with the decision of Judge Rosg, 
of the United States circuit court of northern California ? 

Mr. Shields. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Before you finish will you make some comment on 
that decision? 

Mr. Shields. Yes, sir; I will; but I should now like to read this 
reconunendation by the board of game commissioners of Ontario, con- 
tinuing from where I left off: 

A most vigorous lobby wns. bowever. eondueted in the interest of tlie manu- 
facturers against the bill, which was ultimately killed. 

The board recommends most emphatically that the use of these wea])ons be 
prohibited. Special attention has been given to the investigation of stats- 
nients made by the opponents of the measure last session, to the effect that 
sportsmen generally approve of the gun, are opposed to its prohibition, and 
are of opinion that it is not an unduly destructive or unsportsmanlike weapon. 
Almost every witness who has appeared before the board has been questioned 
and many have been spoken to in private, with the result that not a single voice 
has been raised in support of it. 

It is objectionable as being unduly destructive, because with little or no 
practice it can be used as rapidly as a repeating gun in the hands of a highly 
trained expei't, and it is especially destructive where a bevy of partridge or 
quail do not all take wing at the same instant. 

'I'lic 1110S1 conclusive objection, however, against this gun is that by its use 
]arj;c iiuihIkts of birds are wounded which would otherwise escape untouched. 
The dilliculty of estimating the range of birds aimed at is well known, and 
where the sportsman can shoot four or five times by merely pressing the trigger, 
the temptation to continue shooting is irresistible, the re.sult being that one, 
two. or even three shots are discharged at a distance too great for killing, and 
numbers of birds are bit whieb are .ililc to escape for the time, only to die 
within a day or two. 

That is from the official report of the Ontario game commission, 
and I can show yon a report of the Pennsylvania State game com- 
mission in almost the same word.-. They recommend the prohibi- 
tion of the use of this autoniatic -hotgnn and for the same reasons 
stated there. 



AUTOMATIC SHOTGLTN. 7 

Mr. Caprox. Has there been any law enacted in the Province of 
•Ontario prohibiting the use of that gun i 

i\Ir. Shields. Tlie bill was defeated there last winter in their com- 
anittee. and it is up now again with, they say. a fair chance of passage, 
in spite of the oj^position ; but the Provinces of Manitoba and Alberta 
have enacted laws against tliis gun, and they are on tlie statute books 
there to-day, so that the gun can not be used there legally. 

The Chairman. Assuming that this is a highly destructive gun, 
the Chair would suggest that you discuss what may be the constitu- 
tional, legal questions relating to its use. 

Mr. Shields. Yes, sir; I will come to that shortly. 

Mr. McKiNNEY. And I wish Mr. Shields would take up the dis- 
cussion in some way of the question why one particular arm should 
be prohibited in its use. rather than that we shoidd have a general 
prohibition of the use of any aruL 

Mr. Shields. I will say in answer to that question that, personally, 
T would be glad to see a law enacted to prohibit the use of any gun 
on God's earth in hunting any wild animal or bird for at least five 
years to come. 

Mr. HiGGiNS. In other words, you would prohibit absolutely the 
use of firearms for the hunting of any kind of game I 

Mr. Shields. Yes. sir: for at least five years. 

Mr. HiGGiNS. And make that general throughout the country? 

Mr. Shields. Yes. sir; but such laws are impossible to-day. There 
are 10,000,000 shotguns in use in this country, and it would be prac- 
tically impossible to secure the enactment of laws in any State jJi'o- 
hibiting the use of firearms for any such length of time. A number 
of States have passed laws prohibiting the shooting of certain 
species of game for three years at a time, and with very beneficial 
results. AAHien I say I would prohibit all shooting for five years I 
am speaking for the Audubon people and for the nonsporting and 
bird-loving peo^Dle of this country. There are hundreds of thou- 
sands of men and women who do not shoot and who do not approve 
of the shooting of birds or animals. Personally I like to go out and 
kill a bird occasionally; but I would deny myself that right for 
five years or for the rest of my natural life if it would result in 
restoring the birds of the countrj^ in such numbers as they were here 
twenty years ago. 

There are several decisions of the United States Supreme Court, 
and I can furnish you copies of them any day that you may want 
them, from the Department of Agriculture, in which the United 
States Supreme Court has held that the game in each State belongs 
to the ]3eople of the State in their sovereign capacity: that the taking 
or killing of that game is a privilege which the State may extend to 
the people: that that privilege may be limited and aliridged in any 
wav that the State sees fit to abridge it. 

]\Ir. Powers. That is as to the privilege of killing? 

Mr. Shields. Yes, sir; and of selling. 

Mr. Powers. We have that in my State. 

Mr. Caprox. That is true always, acknowledging that the author- 
ity of the State covers this entire subject. I should like to ask you 
if you do not think that the Territorial legislatures of the several 
Territories have absolute jurisdiction over this subject so far as the 
Territories are concerned, barring Alaska? 



6^b 



AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 



Mr. Shields. I am gliul you brought that question up. We are 
here asking you to prohibit the use of this gun in the Territories. 
You are making States so fast that you will liave ]irobably only one 
Territory left at the end of this session. 

The Chairman. Not so very fast. 

Mr. Shields. The prospect is that only one will l)e left at the close 
of this session. Alaska is one of the greatest bird-breeding grounds 
for migratory wild fowl on this continent. A great deal of our 
supply must come from Alaska. There are millions of other birds 
that breed in Alaska that do not come south, and es])ecially I am 
speaking of the eider duck, which does not come south of Alaska, and 
which is very abundant there. It is used by the people for food, and 
its use as food is legitimate imder certain circumstances. The Ter- 
ritory of Alaska is destined to be settled up in the next few years, 
and there will be an immense onslaught on the wild game of that Ter- 
ritory. If for no other reason, we should like to have you pass this 
act to protect the wild life of Alaska. 

]\Ir. Capeon. This law will not reach Alaska at all. if it is ]iassed. 

Mr. Shields. Then I wish to. ask for an amendment to make it 
apply to Alaska. We want Alaska included in it. It is the most im- 
portant part of this country for the preservation of bird life. 

The Chairman. A.ssuming that everybody is quite in sympathy 
with you in the preservation of birds and game, the question arises 
now whether we might lawfully prohibit the use of certain kinds of 
arms. It strikes me it is a highly important element in this matter. 

Mr. Shields. The Supreme Court has ruled that any necessary 
regulation may be made to protect game. There is a case in the 
Supreine Court 

Mr. Eejd. Let me ask von just on this point. It is within the 
power of the State to ]>rohil)it the destruction of game, or to prescribe 
the seasons during which it may be killed, and to make a discrimina- 
tion between diflerent kinds of guns which may be used at tlie time 
when they may be killed ? 

Mr. Shields. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Reid. Now, take the hunting season; would it be constitutional 
to say that you might hunt with one gun and I be prohibited from 
hunting with another? 

Mr. Shields. It would take two or three hours to read all the de- 
cisions of the Supreme Court of the United States on that very point. 
One of them is this: In 1852 the legislature of Maryland passed a 
law that only one kind of rake should be allowed in taking oysters 
from the waters of that State. It provides that this rake should 
have only a certain number of teeth, and that the rake should be of 
only a certain size. Some i^eople undertook to use larger rakes in 
taking oysters. The State arrested them and the offenders were con- 
victed. If you can limit the number of teeth in a rake to be used in 
taking oysters, you can limit the number of shots that a gun may fire 
for killing game. 

Here is another : 

In the supreme court nf Minnesota. State r. Rodman (5S Minn., .303. 400). 
The preservation of such animals as are adapted to consumption as food or to 
any other useful purpose is a matter of public interest, and it is within the 
police power of the State, as the representative of the people in their united sov- 
ereignty, to make such law.s as will best preserve such game. 



AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 9 

This decision \Yas quoted with approval by the Supreme Court of 
the United States in the case of Geer v. Connecticut (161 U. S., 
519, 533), and so was made a part of the decision of the Supreme 
Court rendered in that case. 

Mr. Reid. I would like to ask you if the same principle is not in- 
volved in the legislation whei-e the size of the meshes of nets is pre- 
scribed ? 

Mr. Shields. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Eeid. Also in case of those laws prohibiting the destruction of 
fish with dynamite? 

Mr. Shields. Yes. sir; it is the same principle. And I am positive 
that had the case in which Judge Ross rendered the decision spoken 
of been carried to the Supreme Court of the United States he would 
have been reversed, a dozen similar cases having been carried np there 
with that result. 

The Chairman. "Will you specify those cases ? 

Mr. Shields. Doctor Palmer, of the Biological Society, is prepar- 
ing a list of those cases. I will get advance proof sheets of that list 
within a few days and will send copies to the committee. 

The Chairman. Do any of these provisions atfect the constitutional 
right of the people to keep and bear arms? 

Mr. Shields. That does not relate to guns used in hunting game. 
The States have the right to regulate 

The Chairman. I see that your bill makes the having of the gun 
prima facie evidence of a crime. 

Mr. Shields. Here is a letter which I want to read to you, from 
the Department of Agriculture. 

United States Dep.^rtment of Agriculture, 

Bureau of Biologic.\i. Subve^, 
WashiiigtoH. D. C, yovemlter ^i. 1905. 
Mr. G. O. Shields. 

Editor Shields Magazine. 1269 Broadway, New York. 
My Dear Mr. Shields : On returning to tbe city after an absence of several 
weelis I find your letter of Nevember 11. reiiuesting a list of the States that 
have laws regulating the gauge of guns that may be used in hunting birds. 

Nearly all the States and the provinces of Canada have some legislation of 
this kind, usually prohibiting the use of swivel guns, or those which can not be 
fired from the slioulder. The following lists will show how general this legis- 
lation is : 

(1) States which prohibit swivel guns (usually for hunting water fowl) : 
Delaware. Illinois. Iowa. Massachusetts. Michigan. Minnesota. Missouri, New 
Hampshire, North Dakota. Oregon, Pennsylvania. South Dakota. Tennessee, 
Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, British Columbia. Manitoba, New 
Brunswick. Northwest Territories, Nova Scotia, Ontario, unorganized Terri- 
tories, Yukon territory. 

(2) States which prohibit use of guns other than those fired from the 
shoulder: Colorado. Connecticut. Delaware, District of Columbia, Iowa, Loui- 
siana, Maryland, Nebraska. New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North 
Dakota. Oliio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee, Te.xas, Wash- 
ington, ^'isconsin, Wyoming. 

The Chairman. They limit the size of the guns. 

Mr. Shields. They limit the use of guns to such as can be held 
up and fired from the shoulder. Anything too heavy for that is 
prohil)ited. 

Mr. ]\IcKixNEY. As I understand, you do not object to any other 
kind of a gun than this automatic shotgun. You do not object to 
the repeating rifle or the double-barreled shotgun or the single- 



698 



10 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 

barreled shotpim : Ijut it is the automatic shotgun to -wliich you object? 
Mr. Shields. The automatic is tlie only one mentioned in this bill; 
but I gave notice five years ago to all concerned that we must pro- 
hibit the use of all re2oeating rifles and shotguns if we are to have 
any birds or animals left in this country. I have told these gentle- 
men in half a dozen hearings we have been in that within a few years 
we shall have to ask Congress and the States to pass laws prohibiting 
the use of all repeating sliotguns and rifles. We might just as well 
face this matter. Mr. Hornaday has also stated for years past that 
the time must come when all this must be done, or else we must sub- 
mit to having our forests and our fields become as barren of wild 
animal and bird life as these Capitol grounds to-day. You may 
occasionally see a robin here, or a bluebird, but if the use of all kinds 
of gims is not curtailed to the greatest possible extent the time will 
-come when you will ne\er see a wild bird anywhere except on pre- 
served ground. This letter from the Agricultural Department also 
gives the following : 

(3) States whicb prohibit guus larger than No. 10 gauge: Alaska, .\rizoiia, 
Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio, Utah. 

Now, gentlemen, if you can limit the size of the hole in the barrel 
of a gun which may be used in hunting birds you can certainly limit 
the number of cartridges it may carry. [Reading:] 

(4) States which prohibit guns larger than No. 8 gauge: Tennessee, Vir- 
ginia, Ontario, Quebec. 

(5) Provinces ■ which prohibit the use of the automatic gmi : Manitoba, 
Northwest Territor.y. 

Mr. HiGGiNS. So far as you are concerned personally you are op- 
posed to the use of any sort, of a gun for the killing of game 1 

Mr. Shields. I am willing to assent to that, and personally I am 
in favor of it. 

Mr. HiGoiNs. That is what you would do if it was left to you? 
That would prohibit what is known as the double-barreled shotgun? 

Mr. Shields. Yes, sir. 

Mr. HioGiNs. Will you not conunent, please, on the ditference be- 
tween the quantity of game that can be killed by the ordinary double- 
barreled shotgun and the quantity that can be killed by the gim this 
bill discriminates against? 

Mr. Shields. I A^ill answer that by a letter from Mr. Arthur Rob- 
inson, which reads as follows: 

Danx & RoniNsox, 
New York, March 9.1. lOOG. 
Mr. G. O. Shields. 

IZG'.t Broadway. Xcw YorJc City. 

Deak Sih : Regarding the use of the automatic shotgun, would say that I am 
a menilier of two southern ducking clubs, where these giuis are used very ex- 
tensively. I have seen a (lock of ducks come into a blind where one. two. or 
even three of these guns were in use, and have seen as many as 11 sliots poured 
into a single flock. 

If there had been but three men with double-ljarreled guns there 
would have been only six shots. 

Mr. HiGGixs. They could have reloaded. 

Mr. Shields. Yes; but the birds would go 100 feet while the men 
were getting the empty shells out, reaching after the new shells, put- 



AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 11 

ting lliem in. cldsing the gun. ami getting it to their shoulder. 
(Reading:) 

We have considernble iioaching ou one of these clubs, the territory being so 
extensive that it is iuii)ossit)le to prevent it. We own 00.000 neves, and these 
poaeliers. I am told, nearly all use the automatic guns. They frequently kill 
six or eight ducks out of one flock, first taking a raking shot on the water, and 
then getting in the remainder of the magazine before the flock is out of range, 
in fact. Sunn- of them carry two guns, and are able to discharge a part of the 
second magazine into the same flock. 

Fire five shots out of the first gun ; drop it ; pick up the other, and 
get in part of that magazine before the birds get 75 yards away, 
which is about the limit of killing range. This letter continues : 

As I told you the other evening. I am not so much against the gun when in 
the hands of gentlemen and real sportsmen, but. on account of its terrible pos- 
sibilities for market hunters, 1 believe that the only safe way is to abolish 
it entirely, ami 1:hat the better class should be willing 'to give up this weapon 
as being the only means of putting a stop to this willful game slaughter. 
Very trnl.v. yours. 

Arthitk Robinson. 

I have here a number of co])ies of this letter, and I will be glad to 
give you gentlemen the addresses of these clubs and give you a chance 
to communicate with the people on the ground, so that you can get 
at all the facts. 

Now. :Mr. ilarshall will read you a letter from the President of the 
United States bearing on this subject, and iii self-defense 

Mr. Cole. Have you any from Grover Cleveland? 

Mr. Spiields. No, sir; I have never taken the matter up with him. 

Mr. Cole. He is mighty good authority. 

Mr. Shields. In January last I called on President Roosevelt in 
order to get an expression from him as to whether he favored the use 
of this automatic gun or not. The President received me and I 
talked with him. I said, '' Mr. President, I have come to talk with 
you about the automatic shotgun and tell you I am fighting it." He 
said, " I know it, and I am with you heart and soul." I said, '" That 
is good; and now may I quote you to that effect?" He said, " Yes. 
Sit down, I want to talk with you." We sat down and talked over the 
matter for half an hour. Here is the interview as I wrote it out. I 
sent him a typewritten co^jy of it and wrote him : 

Mr. President, here is a copy of the interview that I had with you. If I 
have not (luoted you correctly, please say so. If you do not wish me to use the 
interview at all. say so. If there are any changes you would like me to make in 
it please make them. 

Mr. HiGGixs. I understand that the President has hunted mountain 
lions? 

Mr. Shields. Yes, sir. 

jNIr. HiGciNs. Do you suppose that he would trust himself out in 
tlie woods without a repeating rifle, with lions all around him ? 

i\Ir. Shields. I think he would. He is a thorough sportsman and 
a dead shot with a rifle. 

I have never had any trouljle in Ivilling any game on this continent 
with a single shot. Sometimes I have not done it, but if a man is a 
careful hunter and a careful shot, he can kill any animal in this coun- 
try with a single shot. It may be necessary sometimes to give an 
animal a seccmd shot, or even more, to keep him from running too far, 



12 AUTOMATIC SHOTGTJlir. 

Ijut theiv is no elangerous aniiual on this continent except the grizzly 
bear, and in hunting these it is well to have a repeating rifle. Bnt 
that is the only animal on this continent that will ever attack you. I 
will read you what the President said. I sent him a typewritten copy 
of this interview, as I said. 

Mr. BovEE. Mr. Chairman, may I make a suggestion? I do not 
think that the name of the President should be introduced in this dis- 
cussion, 23iii'ticularly in the way in which it has been introduced. I 
think it is a question of propriety, of a gentleman placing himself 
upon record as being in contradiction with the President of the 
United States in respect to some proposed legislation, and I suggest 
to the gentleman on the other sicle that nothing should be said, be- 
cause it invites a statement in this controversy which I hoped might 
be obviated. 

The Chairjian. There is a rule which prevails, I thfnk, in commit- 
tees as well as on the floor of both Houses, that criticism should not 
be indidged in by either House of the other. But I know of no rule 
in relation to comments upon the Executive wuthin reasonable bounds. 
If any member of the committee knows of any such rule, I would like 
to have him mention it. 

Mr. Moon. No, sir ; there is no such rule as to the President. He is 
free property. Just hit him as j'ou want to. 

The Chairman. A good deal must be trusted to the sense of pro- 
priety which animates all gentlemen in this matter. Mr. Shields is 
presenting his view in relation to this matter, and I suppose the gen- 
tlemen on the other side will want to present their view. 

jNIr. BovEE. If we do so, we will do so with extreme reluctance, 
having expressed our desire to avoid it, as it involves a question of 
veracity between the President of the United States and the gentle- 
man who is addressing the committee. 

Ml'. Shields. I am perfectly willing to withdraw wdiat I have 
said and not to present the letter to you, if the gentlemen on the 
other side will not say anything about it and will refrain from read- 
ing their letter from the President. 

The Chairman. If you gentlemen by mutual agreement desire to 
strike out all reference to the matter, I suppose that might be done. 

Mr. Shields. I simply started to read this in self-defense. 

(Informal discussion and conversation betAveen tlie members of 
the committee followed.) 

Mr. Shields. I believe the question has not been quite settled as 
to whether I shoidd read my letter from the President and the inter- 
view witli him. If the committee desires to have it left out, I am 
quite willing to leave it out. 

Mr. Lloyd. I think you have got to a point where you had better 
read it. 

The Chairman. With that mulerstanding, will the committee 
agree to let the other side have as much time this morning as has 
been consumed on behalf of the bill ? You have talked fifty minutes, 
Mr. Shields. 

Mr. Shields. I had started to say that I sent the President a type- 
written copy of this interview, and I told you what I had written 
him. 

The interview referred to bv Mr. Shields, as presented by him, is 
here jDrinted in the record, as follows : 



701 



AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 13 

PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT IS WITH US. 

I cnlU'.l nil President Roosevelt at the White House, January 17, and had a 
long and interesting tallv with him on the subjeot of game protection. In the 
course of our conversation the President cxiircss<>d liiniself as heartily in sym- 
pathy witli our campaign against the autoiii,-iti<- sliotsun. 

I aslced him if I might quote him to that effect, and he replied that I might ; 
that lie l•c^'arded that weapon as a serious menace to the bird life of this 
country, :uid tliat he is heartily in favor of the enactment of laws to prohibit 
its use in the Imnting of birds and wild animals. He said we had lived through 
the time when the buffalo and the antelope were everywhere on the plains; 
when great herds of elk could be found in almost any range of mountains west 
of the Jlississippi ; when mountain sheep traveled in great bands, even down 
in the Bad Lands of the upper Missouri Kiver. In those days we did not think 
it would over be necessary to restrict the killing of game. We did not realize 
then that wild animals could be photographed alive in their native haunts. 

We have lived to see all these conditions changed. The head hunters, the 
skin hunters, and the thoughtless sportsmen have swept these herds of noble 
wild animals off the earth", or have decreased their numbers to such an extent 
that all we can do now is to preserve and perpetuate the remnant. 

We have seen the prairie chicken and the wild turkey e.xterminated in certain 
States where they \\ere once abundant. We have seen the quail and the wood- 
cock and the rufCed grouse decimated, until but pitiable remnants of these noble 
species remain. Hereafter thouglitful sportsmen should bend their utmost ener- 
gies to the preservation of what is left, and where shooting can be permitted at 
all it slinnld lie with a view to the preservation of species rather than to the 
making of big bags. 

He said he wanted the sportsmen of this country to understand that they 
have his hearty sympathy in their efforts to save our wild animals from ex- 
termination, and that he will do all in his power to aid in this good work. 

In bis latest book, " Pastimes of an American Hunter," the President says: 

" True sportsmen, worthy of the name, men who shoot only in season and in 
moderation, do no harm whatever to game. The most olijectionable of all game 
destroyers is, of course, the kind of game butcher who simply kills for the sake 
of the record of slaughter, who leaves deer and ducks and prairie chickens to 
rot after he has slain them. Such a man is wholly obnoxious ; and, indeed, so 
is any man who shoots for the purpose of establishing a record of the quantity 
of game Idlled. To my mind this is one unfortunate feature of what is other- 
wise the admirably sportsmanlike English spirit in these matters. The custom 
of shooting great bags of deer, grouse, quails, and pheasants, the keen rivalry in 
making such bags, and their publication in sportsmen's journals, are symptoms 
of a spirit which is most unhealthy from every standpoint. It is to be earnestly 
hoped that every American hunting or fishing club will strive to inculcate among 
its own members, and in the minds of the general public, that anything lilce an 
excessive bag, any destruction for the sake of making a record, is to be severely 
reprobated," 

The President replied in this wise : 

(Mr. Shields here read a letter from President Roosevelt, as fol- 
lows:) 

[Personal.] 

My Dear Shields : I am sorryi to say that I must ask you, under no circum- 
stances, to put me in quotation marks ; for though you give the sense of what 
I said, you in no case give the exact language used, so do not try to quote me in 
the first person or to use quotation marlvs. You can state that my views are 
substantially as you have quoted them, but don't actually quote them. 
Sincerely, yours, 

Theodore Roosevelt. 

The Chairman, The President understood the purpose for which 
you wrote him, and the purpose for which you proposed to use his 
reply ? 

Mr, Shields. Most emphatically. I asked him when I went in and 
told him what I came for, what his feeling was in the matter, and he 



703 

14 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 

said, " I am with you in sentiment." and I said, •' May I quote j'ou in. 
print? " He said, " Yes," and lie sat down and tallied with me and 
gave me this interview for publication. 

Mr. Capron. Would it not be an entirely different thing, giving 
you his views for discussion in a magazine and giving you something, 
if he had known that it would be brought before a legislative com- 
mittee of Congress for the purpose of influencing legislation 'i Do you 
think he would then have given you that expression of his opinion? 
It is everything in the bearing which it has in this connection, in my 
judgment. 

]Mr. Shields. I have no desire to place this matter 

Mr. Klepper. Under the rules of the committee could we not. after 
we hear the reading of these letters, strike out that j^ortion of the 
hearing that refers to anything that the President may have said ? 

Mr. Cole. Did he give you any authority in that letter to use it in 
this connection? 

Mr. Shields. Most emphatically. Here is his letter. Pass it 
among you; j'ou can all look at it [offering letter to the committee]. 
He says that I have reported the substance of what he said, and that 
I might go ahead and use it. Here ai'e several copies of the inter- 
view as finally used, not in the first person, and not quoted. What 
the President objects to is that when I sent this out to some of the 
newspapers some of them edited it liberally, ])ut it in quotation marks,, 
and put it in the first person, which I did not do. 

STATEMENT OF MR. C. N. BOVEE. 

Mr. BovEE. ^Ir. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I ap- 
pear here as a lawyer to speak for the Winchester Repeating Arnjs 
Company against the pending bill. The reputation and character of 
my client, I think, calls for no explanation from me. It has done 
more to advance the name of American gun inventors and American 
manufacturers of firearms than any other concern in the world. It 
is jierhaps the most reputable manufactui'er of fireanns in the world. 

I regret that Mr. Shields has seen fit to bring in the name of the 
President of the United States in this discussion. I think this com- 
mittee could have disposed of this question without involving him 
in a question of veracity between him and the gentleman who has 
just spoken, but. in view of what has been stated, I will now read the- 
entire letter of the President of the United States to this gentleman, 
acldi'essed to him after the interview which he has referred to, and 
after the publications of the press, and I ask you gentlemen to give 
attention particularly to what the President has said, in view of 
what the gentleman has said as to the statement made by the Presi- 
dent that he was not to quote him as having made the statements. 

Ths White House. 
WaxJiinfftoii. February 19. 1906. 
Sir: It appears that yon have purported to give an extended interview with 
me in riuotation marl;*:, pnttin.g my expressions in tlie first person so as to make 
me resiHinsilile for both tlie thought and the language. This is inexcusable on 
your part. At the time you called upon me and I talked over informally with 
you tlie (piestion of the preservation of game and of wild life generally in its 
various aspects. I told you explicitly that while .vou could state that I was in 
hearty general accord with your efforts, you were not to try to quote my lan- 
guage, and subsequently I wrote you repeating this. As a matter of fact, in 



VUcJ 

AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 15 

what purports to be tliese quotations, you in no ease give the exact language 
that I used. By pretending thus to give it, and by what you omit, as well as 
what you insert whieh I had not said, you convey on certain points an entirely 
false impression, and .you leave me no alternative but to explicitly rejaidiate 
your statement, whieh I hereby do. Had you been content to say that you gave 
the general sense of what I said you would ha\e done what you were authorized 
to do. But when you attempted to give my exact words you not only did what 
T explicitly told you you should not do, but you used language which I explicitly 
told you was in no case accurate. Xot one single sentence you quote is as I 
said it. Some of the sentences are sheer inventions. Others ai'e inventions In 
part, and some of the things I said were omitted. It is uimecessary to char- 
acterize such conduct on your part. 

Yours, etc., Theodore Roosevelt. 

Mr. G. O. Shields. 

126il Broadivay. Room 601, Netc York. 

Xow, gentlemen. I reiterate what I have stated before, that I would 
not have introduced that letter in this discussion if the gentleman did 
not in\-ite it, because I do not think that private citizens seeking to 
advocate legislation in which they are interested have the right to 
involve the President in a question of veracity in a controversy of 
this chariicter. But the letter becomes pertinent and material upon 
this inquiry as an illustration of the sources from which some of 
these statements have emanated. The gentleman comes here and 
frankly admits that he would prohibit the use of any shotgims 
and any rifles whatever, and that great industries like the Remington 
Arms Company, great industries like the Winchester Repeating 
Arms Company, employing, as that institution does, over 4,000 em- 
ployees, and spreading the great reputation of the United States as 
manufacturers of the best quality of products of this kind, promoters 
of inventors, should be closed up for five years and their industry 
destroyed. ^Aliy, gentlemen, it is monstrous ! The proposition is 
preposterous ! 

The gentleman knows of that decision of this judge of the United 
States circuit court, Judge Ross. He knew of it before he came here, 
and he knew that the constitutionality of an act of this character 
would be i^resented in a decision rendered by a Federal judge in 
this country in California upon precisely the jDoint involved here, 
and yet, knowing of this decision and knowing that this inquiry 
woidd be made of him as to whether this bill was constitutional, he 
comes here and indidges in general remarks to the effect that the 
Supreme Court of the United States would have reversed Judge 
Ross if that case had been taken up; and yet he can not cite a case, 
although the chairman of the committee asks him to particularize. 
Of course he can not cite a case, because there is no such case. Of 
course States have a right to limit the amount of game which can 
be killed and also to place a limitation as to the time within which 
game shall be killed, and within such limitations the Supreme Court 
of the United States has held such laws constitutional. But here 
is a bill determined by a competent authority to be unconstitutional 
after a full and exhaustive hearing, and did the gentleman entertain 
the views of this matter, that he claims to entertain, it would have 
been a very simple matter to bring here the decision of the Supreme 
Court of the United States to which he has referred, because the 
decision of Judge Ross was rendered in 1900. He coidd have gotten 
to the Supreme Court of the United States if he was so deeply inter- 
^.sted in the principle which he advocates. 



/U4 

16 • AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 

The Chairman. Now, I assume, Mr. Bovee, that you are also 
speaking in the interest of the industries which you represent? 

Mr. Bovee. Yes, sir. 

Tlie CHAiRMA>f. And are you in favor of wliat we all regard as a 
very laudable object, that of the iDreservation of game? 

Mr. Bovee. Undoubtedly so, sir. And these industries are all 
interested in the protection of the game. If the game is to be killed 
ofl' of the face of this continent, the business of the manufacturers of 
the A^'inchester rifle and the Winchester shotgun and all the other 
arms that they manufacture — and it is the same with the Remington 
Arms Company — is going to be swept away in that respect. They 
believe in legitimate limitation as to the number of quail and par- 
tridge and deer which may be killed, and that within the season. 
They are in favor of all such limitations. 

Mr. Klepper. Do we imderstand by your statements that Mr. 
Shields has submitted to this committee what the President said in 
quotation marks? 

Mr. Bovee. I understand only what the record shows. I have 
read the letter from the President to Mr. Shields protesting against 
the publication of the article which has been submitted to the com- 
mittee. 

Mr. Klepper. It is not claimed, as I read it, that it is in quotation 
marks — what the President said. 

Mr. Reid. It does not purjDort to be quoted at all. 

Mr. Klepper. No; it does not purport to be quoted. It says at 
the end of the interview: 

In his latest book, Pastimes of an American Hunter, the President says — 

and then proceeds to give a quotation from a book written by the 
President. That is in quotation marks, of course. 

]\Ir. Bovee. I will show j'ou the publication that the President 
referred to. Here is a publication in the New York Sun of Friday, 
February 10. 1906. The letter of the President was written after 
that publication. 

Mr. Klepper. I did not want the committee to be misled in this 
matter. 

Mr. Bovee. I do not wish them to be misled, and I thank you for 
calling it to mj' attention. 

Mr. McKiNXEY. Is it not your understanding that he quoted the 
President as being favorable to his view ? 

Mr. Lloyd. The President says that in the letter which he read. 

Mr. BovEE. He does not say that he is favorable, as I understand, 
to this bill or to any proposition of this character. 

Mr. McKiNNEY. He says that he is favorable to the preservation 
of game. 

Mr. BovEE. Here is the publication that the President had refer- 
ence to, reported in the New York Sun of February 10, 1906. The 
letter of the President is dated February 19, 1906, aiid is as follows: 

[From the Sun, Friday, February Ifv 190B.1 

I'l-esidcnt In xiinii.iDirii — Pleads for iirrsirnilidii uf irihi animal life — Auto- 
matic shoti/ini conih limed OK threatriiinii r.iliiiniinitiuii nf birds — Case of the 
elk and huff ulo— Killing for sake of record uiispiirlsiininlil.T. 
President Roosevelt's view.s on the subject o£ game protection will be touched 
upon in the next issue of Shields's Magazine. G. O. Shields, who is president - 
of the League of Amoricau Sportsmen, called on the President at the White 



*^05 



AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 17 

House on .lanuiuy ]7. ami the couversation turned upon the automatic shotgun. 
When he saw what views the President held. Mr. Shields asked permission to 
iliiote him. The President's reply, as given by the magazine, was as follows : 

■■ By all means. You may say I regard that weapon as a serious menace to the 
bird life of tliis coimtry. and that I am heartily in favor of the enactment of 
laws to jirohibit its use in the hunting of birds and wild animals. Shields, you 
and I have lived through the time when the buffalo and the antelope were 
everywhere on the plains; v.'hen great herds of elk could be found in almost 
any range oi mountains west of the Mississippi : when mountain sheep trav- 
eled in great bands, even down in the Bad Lands of the upper Missouri River, 
In those days we did not think it would ever be necessary to restrict the ivilling 
of game. We did not realize then that wild animals could be photographed 
alive in their native haunts, 

■■ We have lived to .see all these conditions changed. The head hunters, the 
skin Imnters, and the thoughtless sportsmen have swept these herds of noble 
wild animals off the earth or have decreased their numbers to such an extent 
that all we can do now is to preserve and perpetuate the remnant. 

■" We lirive seen the prairie chicken and the wild turkey exterminated in cer- 
tain States where they v>ere once abundant. We have seen the quail and the 
woodcock and the rufCetl grouse decimated until but iiitiable remnants of these 
noble species remain. Hereafter thoughtful sportsmen should bend their utmost 
I'uergies to the preservation of what is left, and where shooting can be per- 
mitted at all it should be with a view to the preservation of species rather than 
to the making of big bags. 

■■ Mr. Shields, I want you and all the sportsmen of this country who are work- 
ing with you to understand that you and they have my hearty sympathy in 
your efforts to save our wild animals from extermination, and that I will do 
all in my power to aid in your woiic." 

In his latest book, Pastimes of an American Hunter, the President says: 

" True sportsmen, worthy of the name, men who shoot only in season and in 
moderation, do no harm whatever to game. The most objectionable of all game 
destroyers is, of course, the kind of game butcher who simply kills for the sake 
of the record of slaughter, who leaves deer and ducks and prairie chickens to 
rot after he has slain them. Such a man is wholly obnoxious ; and, indeed, so 
is any man who shoots for tlie purpose of establishing a record of the quantity 
of game killed. To my mind this is one unfortunate feature of what is other- 
wise the admirably sportsmanlike English spirit in these matters. The custom 
of shooting great bags of deer, grouse, quail, and pheasants, the keen rivalry in 
making sueli bags and their pulilication in sportsmen's journals are s.vmptoms 
of a spirit which is most unhealthy from ever.y standpoint. It is to be earnestly 
hoped that every American htinting or fishing club will strive to inculcate among 
its own members and in the minds of the .general public that an.vthing like an 
excessive liag. any destruction for the sake of making a record, is to be severely 
reprobated." 

Mr, Powers. Did I not uiideri3tand Mr. Shields correctly to say that 
while he did not in his magazine put what the President said in quo- 
tation marks, as the language of the President, he sent the interview 
as prepared by him out to newspapers, and the newspapers changed 
it and published it in that way, putting that language in quotation 
marks? 

j\Ir. BovEE. I understand that to be the fact; btit it is a significant 
fact that in two newspapers in New York City the quotations from 
the President are in the same form — in the New York Sun and the 
New York World. 

The Chairjian. After all. while we all of us have a very high re- 
gard for the President, and for his ojDinions on all questions, is this 
question of the construction of what he said and wrote to Mr. Shields 
at all vital in this controversy ? 

Mr. BovEE. I do not think so; I think it ought to have been left 
out entirely. 

The Chairm.\x. And ought we not to get down now to the question 
of the bill ? 



18 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 

Mr. BovEE. I think so. The interview with the President is sub- 
stantially as it appears in the New York Sun. There was but one 
interview with the President of the United States, and the Presi- 
dent repudiates it, and there is the report of that interview to which 
he undouliedly has reference [referring to newspaper article]. 

The CirAiRjrAN. Do you doubt that he is in favor of the preserva- 
tion of game? 

Mr. BovEE. He is ; certainly. 

The Chairji.\n. And I have no doubt that all the members of this 
committee and the people of the countrv generally are in sympathy 
with Mr. Shields's efforts in that directmn. The question now is as 
to the constitutionality of this measure, and if it may be construed 
to be constituticmal. whether it would be desirable to report such a 
bill. 

Mr. BovEE. Yes, sir. Now. let me say that this bill applies to four 
Territories. Tlie criticism of one of the memljers of tlie connnittee 
clearly pointed to the fact that in each of these Territories they liave 
a legislative body competent to pass upon a bill of this character. Tf 
a bill of this character is constitutional, and can be made a law. 
there is a legislative body for that jaurpose in the Territory, and tlie 
qnestion naturally arises why is not that the place to go with such a 
bill, where representatives from the different ])arts of these terri- 
tories, having full and particular knowledge of the conditions exist- 
ing in the dift'erent parts of the Territory, coming as they do from all 
the different parts and ramifications of that Territory, could deter- 
mine whether such a bill is practical and necessary? 

Mr. Powers. In all the acts relating to Alaska we find that Alaska 
is designated not as a Territory, but as '• the district of Alaska." It 
is not in any of the laws or acts passed concerning it referred to as a 
Territory. 

Mr. Bovee. Yes. sir. I do not think this bill had in contemplation 
Alaska. This bill was presented to the legislature in Oklahoma, and 
it. has been defeated. It is a fact that no State in the Union has 
passed this bill. It has been attempted to be passed in the State of 
Massachusetts, and has been defeated; in the State of Connecticut 
twice, and defeated; in the State of New York once, and never en- 
acted into law. It was submitted last year, and it was submitted on 
the same arguments that have been made here to-day, and was never 
reported out of the committee. It was defeated in the State of New 
Jersey twice. In the State of Pennsylvania it was presented three 
times, and never enacted } in tlie State of Michigan once, and de- 
feated ; in the State of Wisconsin once, and defeated ; in the State of 
Minnesota twice, and defeated ; in North and South Dakota, and de- 
feated, and perhaps North and South Dakota, on the question of the 
preservation of the sage hen or the jDartridge, might be said to be 
deeply interested in an enactment of this character. In California it 
was ijresented and defeated, in the State of Kansas it was defeated, in 
Missouri it was defeated, in the State of Arkansas it was defeated, 
and in the State of Kentucky it was defeated. 

The Chairman. It was defeated in committee 

Mr. BovEE. It was never enacted into a law, after several presenta- 
tions in many of these States, on the same arguments that have been 
made here to-day. And. gentlemen, we ought not to be misled by the 
enthusiastic expressions on the general subject of the preservation of 



707 

AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 19 

game eniaimting from such societies as the Audubon Society, of New 
York City, and as the Zoological Society or the Museum of Natural 
History, of New York. Of course, you" can go abroad and get peti- 
tions that would reach from here to the Pacific Ocean on the general 
subject of the preservation of game, and there are thousands and 
thousands of people who would not have a bird killed or an animal 
killed ; thev would not have a moose or a deer killed, or any form of 
game killed, at any time, or any birds whatever. There are hundreds 
and thousands of people who entertain views of that character, and 
you could get all sorts of letters. 

But here is the practical question: It concedes the right of a man 
to use a repeating rifle which will shoot 13 times without taking the 
gun from the shoulder. It concedes the right to use a revolver which 
■will shoot any number of times without lowering the hand, just by 
pressing the trigger. It concedes the right to use any self-loading 
gun, or any gun of any sort, except this form of gun which has been 
invented by this gentleman over there. Mr. Browning, and which is 
in the course of manufacture by the Remington company. If you 
are going to prohibit an advanced firearm like this, why not prohibit 
the Eemmgton rifle and the Winchester repeating rifle, which shoots 
9 times, and why give a gentleman who is exterminating moose and 
deer and caribou a preference over the man who is using a shotgun? 
And in respect to the shotgun, the double-barreled gun is not pro- 
liibited. They do not infringe on your right to use a double-barreled 
shotgun. Say that a bunch of quail starts up and a man shoots one 
there and one there. That is two shots. \\Tiere are the quail by 
that time? Are they sitting there on a branch waiting for him to 
shoot again? 

Mr. Capron. (renerallv. when some of us shoot, thev are. [Laugh- 
ter.] 

INIr. BovEE. i can give you an illusti'ation from an interesting let- 
ter written by a local sportsman out in the West: Three of them 
went f)ut to shoot jack rabbits. Two of them had the noxious and 
vicious automatic gmis. One of them was on one side and one on 
the other of this sportsman, and he had his old Parker gun, shooting 
2 shots, and he describes in the most interesting way how these gen- 
tlemen showed how they had nothing to do but throw up the gun and 
pull the trigger. Well, he got the jack rabbits with his old Parker 
gun, and these gentlemen had the pleasure of shooting into the air. 
And it goes without saying that the sight can not be held on a bird, 
and that sight must be taken at each bird separately', almost as 
though the gun was removed from the shoulder, because the I'ecoil 
will throw it off. 

]\Ir. Reid. What is the advantage of the gun ? 

Mr. Bo\'EB. I do not know what the advantage is in the gun. It 
is supposed that it is an advance in the line of the manufacture of 
firearms. 

Mr. Reid. It ought to have some useful purpose if it is patented. 
Mr. BovEE. Yes, sir; and I presume that it has. It carries five 
shots. 

Mr. Powers. Have you ever examined into the laws of the State 
of Maine in this regard ? 
jNIr. Bo\'EE. No, sir. 



708 

20 AUTOMATIC SHOTGITN. 

Mr. Powers. We have found that the limitation upon the time 
within which game may be Ivilled and the limitation upon the amount 
of game that can be killed, rather than any legislation as to the 
weapon, has been able in our State to increase the amount of game, 
and thei'e is much more there than there was ten years ago. 

Mr. BovEE. Certainly ; that is constitutional and is the jjractical 
manner of reaching it. For instance, you can limit a man to 20 
quail a day. You can only kill two deer in the State of Maine, and 
that within a very short space of time each year. And it is a signifi- 
cant fact that in Elaine, which has more deer than any otlier pai't of 
the country, they never have attempted to pass this bill, because 
they knew that that State was full of sportsmen, and it would be 
killed the minute that it was presented. 

Mr. PoA\Ei!S. Maine is the finest game prese^^■e in the world. 

Mr. BovEE. Yes. sir; it is the finest game preserve in the world. 
They kill hundreds of moose and caribou and deer every year; and 
yet in that State of sportsmen, where shotguns and rifles are used, 
these gentlemen have not seen fit to ask the legislature to pass this 
bill. 

Now. as to the constitutionality of this bill. Let us take the case 
of Mather r. iNIarshall (reported in 102 Fed. Rep., 323) in the United 
States circuit court for the northern district of California. Judge 
Tioss, one of the best judges on the circuit bench, decided that case. 

The petitioner was convicted in the justice's court of Marin Coimty, 
Cal., of a violation of the provisions of an ordinance enacted by the 
board of supervisors of that countv, declaring in its seventh section 
that^ 

Ever.v person who. in the county of Marin, shall use any kind of a repeating 
shotgun or any kind of a magazine shotgun for the purpose of killing or de- 
stroying any kind of wild duck, geese, quail, partridge, doves, or any other 
birds shall be guilty of a misdemeanor — 

and liy its eighth section prescribing that — 

Any jierson violating any provision of this ordinance .shall be guilty of a 
misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by imprisonment 
in the county jail for not less than ten days or more than thirty days, or pay a 
fine of not less than twenty dollars or more than two hundred dollars, or by 
both such fine and imprisonment. .\ judgment that the defendant p.i.v a fine 
may also direct that he be imprisoned luitil the fine is satisfied, specifying the 
extent of imprisonment, which must not exceed one day for every dollar of the 
fine. ( 102 Fed. liep., ?.2o. ) 

So that you will sec that the precise (juestion arose in that case in 
respect to the ordinance. That was the oidy question before the 
court on which the man was brought up on habeas corpus. What 
did Judge Ross say ? I quote from his language : 

But surely, in a case like the one at bar, where there is no question of the 
public safet.v, public health, or public morals, and where the prohibited act is 
in no respect malum in se, the absolute prohibition of the use of one's own 
property on his own land can not be held to be a reasonable exercise of the 
police power, when regulations will plainly attain the end desired by the legis- 
lation in question. In the present instance, what was the end sought? Mani- 
festly only the prevention of the taking or killing by one person of more than 
2r> quail, jiartridge, or grouse in any one day : for section 3 of the ordinance 
provides : " Every person who, in the county of Marin, shall take, kill, or de- 
stroy more than 2.5 quail, partridge, or grouse in one day, and every person 
who, in the county of Marin, shall have in his possession in any one day more 



^t^09 



AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 21 

Uian '-Ti qiiMil. lun-tr'ulgo, or groiisf. shall be guilty of a misdemeanor." That 
eiMl is just as effectively accomplished without the ohuoxious section as with it. 
It is \Yholly immaterial to that object whether the sportsman or hunter use _a 
repeating or magazine gun or a double or single barreled gun. When the limit 
is reached he has to stoji shooting or incur the penalty preserilied. And the 
opportunity of detection is just as great in the one ease as in the other. No 
valid reason is therefore perceived, and none has been suggested by counsel, 
why the owner of a repeating or magazine shntgun should be prohibited from 
using it. anil the o,vvner of the eqUalb' if not more effective double-barreled 
automatic-ejector shotgun be free to use it. 

He means the Parker gun, and guns of that character. 

The Chairman. In that case the defendant killed the game on his 
own land ? I have not read the decision clear through. Does it make 
any difference? 

Mr. BovrEE. I do not think there is any distinction on that point. 
It was in respect to the legislation itself. 

The Chairman. The court makes no distinction? 

Mr. Bo\TEE. No, sir. You will see that it has been declared uncon- 
stitutional. Further he says : l 

The equal jirotection of the laws to which every person is, by the provision 
of the Constitution of the United States above quoted, declared entitled, would 
indeed be a vain thing if such discriminatory legislation was sustained by the 
courts. If section 7 of the ordinance in question Is valid, no reason is perceived 
why the process of elimination may not be extended by next prohibiting the 
use of the double-barreled automatic-ejector shotgun, next all but muzzle-load- 
ing gnus, and so on until the poiigun only is permitted to be used upon wild duck, 
geese, quail, partridge, grouse, doves, or other birds in Marin Country. Laws 
enacted in the exei'cise of the police power, whether by a municipal corpora- 
tion acting in pursuance of the laws of a State, or by a State itself, must be 
i-easonahle and arc always subject to the provisions of both the Federal and 
State '-'nstitutions. and thev are always subject to judicial .scrutiny. (Yick 
Wo c. Hopkins. 118 U. S.. 372: Forster r. Scott. l.Sfi N. Y.. 577. .584: Toledo. 
Wabash & W. R. P.. Co. v. City of .Jacksonville, 67 111., 37; Ex parte Whittwell, 
»8 Cal.. 7.3.) 

Further on he says : 

Enough has been said, I think, to show that the section of the ordinance 
under which the petitioner was convicted and is imprisoneil is unconstitutional 
and void. 

Mr. Eeid. If I note it clearly the ordinance prohibited the killing 
of more than a certain number of birds? 

Mr. BovEE. No, sir; the law prohibited the use of the automatic 
shotgun. The petitioner was convicted in the justice's court of 
Marin County, Cal., of the violation of the provisions of an ordinance 
enacted by the board of supervisors of that county, declaring in its 
seventh section that " Every person, who, in the county of Marin, 
shall use any kind of a ref)eating shotgun, or any kind of a magazine 
shotgun," and so forth. 

Mr. Eeid. They put it on the broad ground? 

Mr. BovEE. Yes, sir; that legislation of that character was contrary 
to the Constitution of the United States. 

Mr. Klepper. Will you allow me to ask you a question? 

Mr. BovEE. Certainly, sir. 

Mr. Klepper. Suppose there was no limitation there as to the num- 
ber of birds that one could kill in a day, do you think the court would 
then have decided as he did? 

Mr. Bovee. Undoubtedly so. That was simply an illustration of 
the practical way in which game birds could be preserved, just b}^ 



710 



AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 



imposing :i limitation as to the number of quail to be killed in a da\\ 
and also that they must be killed within a certain season. 

Mr. HiGGiNS. There is no question, is there, about the constitu- 
tionality of the law that prevents the killing of more than a certain 
number of quail in a day ? 

Mr. BovEE. No, sir: the Supreme Court of the United States has 
passed on that. Theve can not be any doubt about it. Xow, in the 
lieadnotes of this case, which is, of course, a concise digest, it says: 

A eountj" ordlnauce making it a misdeuieanor to use any kind of a repeating 
shotgun or any kind of a magazine shotgun for the purpose of killing or destroy- 
ing any kind of wild duck, geese, tjuail. partridge, doves, or any other birds, 
is in conflict w itli the fourteenth amendment of the Constitution of the United 
States. 

Where the manifest purpose of a coiuity ordinance is to prevent the taking 
or killing by one person of more than 25 quail, partridge, or grouse in auy one 
day. it is not a reasonable exercise of its police power to prohibit its killing, 
within such limit, by the use of a repeating shotgun or magazine gnu. 

The Chairman. Mr. Bovee. Mr. Shields in the course of his re- 
marks called attention to certain laws of certain States and to cer- 
tain decisions regulating the bore and the weight of the gun. 
Now, if you may regulate the bore and weight of a gun why may 
you not regulate the number of sliots that may be fired by a gun? 
It struck me that that was an important jioint suggested by Mr. 
Shields. 

Mr. Bovee. I do not know that the legislation to which he has 
called attention has ever passed the test of judicial scrutiny. 

The Chairman. I understood Mr. Shields to cite some decision. 

Mr. Shields. On various points, but not on that. But as a 
matter of fact those cases have come up. In those States regulating 
the bore of the gun and regiilating the use of swivel guns those 
cases have gone into the courts. 

The Chairman. Can either of you gentlemen cite a decision on 
those things? 

INIr. Bo\'ee. I have stated the facts in tlie case of Marshall in the 
United States circuit coui't, with respect to precisely this matter. 
I know of no case where the constitutional question has been raised 
in an act limiting the bore of a gun. I do not know that there is any 
such legislation. It may be so, but I do not know of any case where 
it has 2^assed judicial scrutiny' where the constitutional question has 
been raised. 

Mr. Powers. In your practice Ijefore the United States circuit 
courts — I have no doubt that it has been large — have you not found 
that the different circuits in different States often decided exactly 
the same questions entirely different? 

Mr. Bovee. I can not recall the number of circuit judges that there 
are. I can perhaps answer your question best by a personal remi- 
niscence. Some years ago I had an important litigation against a 
great Pittsburg steel concern. Park Brothers & Co. I removed the 
case into the Federal court for defendant. Plaintiffs moved to I'c- 
mand. They first went into the State court and moved to vacate the 
order of removal, and in the course of my investigation of that ques- 
tion I found that many circuit courts of the United States were dia- 
metrically opposed to each other, as has been suggested, and that the 
weight of authority was in favor of removal by reason of the fact 
that that great justice of the Supreme Court of th6 United States, 



711 



AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 23 

Jiulfio Miller, of Iowa, hacl written a very convincing and strong 
oj)inion in favor of my contention. The question came up on a mo- 
lioi! ill the State court to vacate the order of removal. I succeeded 
there in defeating- the application and holdino; the case in the circuit 
court. It was apjiealed to the general term of the Supreme Court. 
One of the best judges that we have upon the bench wrote a 20-page 
opinion, holding, with some of the cases in, the United States cii'cuit 
court, that the case could not be removed. 

Tlie chief judge then presiding in the court wrote seven lines on the 
bottom of tliat opinion, saying: 

1 flo not concur. I tliink that the weight of authority is in favor of the 
removal of thi.s case to the United States court. 

His associates concurred with him on that subject. Undoubtedly 
it is so, and if ilr. Shields in the wealth of his research has not been 
able to find an authority to the contrary of this which is here, the 
matter of Marshall, and of course with his great interest to sustain 
a measure of this character he would have found it and brought it 
here to you, if there had been any. the conclusion is that there is no 
such authority. And I say that he can not put his finger on the title 
of a case in the Supreme Court of the T'nited States, although he 
has had this Marshall case before him. 

Mr. PowEKS. Is^not this a case that would not be very likely 

Mr. BovEE. He has not l)een able to get a legislature to pass his 
bill. 

Mr. Powers. T confess that I doubt the correctness of that de- 
cision. I am with von on other things, but I am not with vou on 
that. 

Mr. BovEE. Gentlemen ma}' differ in regard to their construction 
of the Constitution of the United States, of course, but there we have 
a judgment. 

Mr. Capron. I presume that is the law now ? 

Mr. BovEE. Yes, sir: and you gentlemen are lawyers, and I pva- 
sume lawyers should all bow humbly to the decision of the circuit 
court. 

Mr. Caprox. If it suits them. 

Mr. BovEE. If it suits them; yes, sir. 

The Chairman. That is not the final judgment, you know. 

Mr. BovEE. If you are going to pass this bill, then, to be perfectly 
consistent, and if yon are going to be thoroughly in harmony with 
Mr. Shields on this matter, yon ought to go further and stop the 
pernicious double-barreled shotgun. You ought to legislate out of 
existence the repeating shotgun, and make us, when we go into 
the woods, limit ourselves to a single-shot rifle. Perhaps some of us 
are not as good sportsmen and shots as Mr. Shields, and perhaps 
if we tackle a grizzly bear, if we have not a repeater we may 
suffer the consequences; but we may console ourselves with the 
thought that it is in the line of the protection of the game of the 
country. And let me call your attention to the fact that the 
game of the country is in the dei^lorable condition in which we 
find it to-day, as depicted by Mr. Shields, not because these guns 
have been in operation; it has not been because of this repeat- 
ing self-loading shotgun that it is as we find it. That has not 
done it. This is a new- invention. It has been on the market only 



712 

24 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN". 

a year. But it is the double-barreled shotgun that has done it 
and the repeating rifle. This gun has not done it; and if you are 
going to prohibit the use of this gun you want to go a step further 
and go to the logical end. 

Now, I want to repeat Avhat I have stated before, that these manu- 
facturers are in favor of the protection of game ; it is their very life. 
It is to their interest, wit^jin constitutional and practical limitations. 
' )f course I do not deny your authority and j'our power, but I say 
that your local legislative bodies in these Tei-ritories are better able 
to judge of the existing conditions in their Territories as to whether 
legislation of this character is demanded. If you are going to en- 
croach upon their legislative prerogative and say that this thing ■ hal! 
not be done in these Territories, regardless of whether they want this 
legislation or not, wjiy. gentlemen, how much furtlier can you go? 
IIow much further ought you to go? If there were no legislative 
body with power to enact laws of this character, then the situation 
would be different. But they have such a body, constituted for that 
precise purpose; and why should these people come here and trouble 
Congress with such a matter, that almost every State in the Union has 
repudiated. 

T have only one further suggestion to make, and that is this: That 
it is not fair to that gentleman who sits over there, who has devoted 
his life as an inventor to the improvement of American mechanical 
contrivances, and to whom the great Government of the United 
States has issued a patent upon this giui. I want to say that the 
Winchester Repeating .Vrms Company does not manufacture this 
gun which is aimed at here: it is manufactured by the Remington 
Company on the patents of that gentleman, and the Government has 
issued a patent to him. and you are practically going to deuA^ to him 
the benefit of his life work and his study in improving American con- 
trivances in advancing the cause of the American manufacturer; and 
I say it is not fair. It is not fair when there is a Vtetter ;inil more 
practical means of protecting the game of the country by means of 
limitation of bag and season within the limits of the Constitution. 
In every State of the Union they have protection of that character, 
and I think the matter should be left to those States. 

I think that is siibstantially what I have been requested to present. 

STATEMENT OF MR. TOM MARSHALL. 

Mr. Marshall. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I 
am an employee of the Remington Arms Company, the people tliat 
manufacture this gun, and I am known as the expert shot that they 
send out over the country to demonstrate the efficiency of the gun, 
or the working qualities. As regards Mr. Shields, we are special 
and particulai" friends, and we have traveled, I suppose, in a dozen 
different States and T(>rritories together this season, contesting this 
bill, and I meet Mr. Shields here to-day exactly on the same grounds. 

This is a business proposition. Mr. Shields is in this as a business 
jiroposition, which I will explain to you in a moment. I am in this 
as a business proposition, as an employee of the Remington Arms 
Company, which manufactiu'es tliis gun. 

We oppose this bill for the reason that it is unjust and unnecessary 
as a matter of game protection, because if they limit the bag, and 



AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 25 

limit the number in the possession, shorten the season (as ahnost 
every State in tlie Union has clone), and control the sale, thej^ have 
the killing of game controlled to as great an extent as it can possibly 
he done at this particular time. This, gentlemen, is along the line of 
game protection. 

ilv friend Shields comes here and tells you that he has expended 
$15,000 of his own money in the protection of game. Gentlemen, I 
■will tell you that that is absoliitelj' true ; but at the same time he has 
expended this $15,000 he has gathered in from the dear people of this 
country by contributions $100,000. I do not know whether Mr. 
Shields knows how much it has been himself. He tells you about the 
organization of the League of American Sportsmen, of 20,000 mem- 
bers. I am not a member of that association. That is the only gold 
brick that I have not purchased. [Laughter.] But a member of 
that association before the legi.slative committee in Albany, N. Y., 
said : "' Gentlemen, I am a member of the League of American Sports- 
men, and it is organized jnst as you formerly organized the ' Buffa- 
loes " of this country.'" He says — Mr. Shields is the great pro- 
tecti%e means of this organization — " You are asked to join the 
League of American Sportsmen, and the fee is a dollar. You write 
on t(i Mr. Shields, send your dollar, and he says. • I am the presi- 
dent of this association, and you are a member, and I have got your 
dollar." and that is all there is of it." 

Mr. Shields says that it is from no financial interest that he comes 
here and represents this bill. I cite you to the list of donators as 
named in his March magazine, and that shows how in the last month 
he has gathered together $400 from all quarters of the world, by rep- 
resenting the automatic gun as the great destroyer of game birds and 
animals. I am satisfied that he could get a subscription from each 
and everj- one of you gentlemen if you coidd hear his pathetic word 
picture, and he has amassed in the last month about $400 (carpenters' 
wages — better than the union scale) ; and why would he not come here 
before you at a small expenditure to advocate this bill when it is to 
his personal, private interest, and a matter of business remuneration 
to him. every donation he secures ? 

He tells yon about Mr. Hornaday, of the Zoological Gardens of 
Xew York. Gentlemen, I am acquainted with this gentleman, who ap- 
peared before a legislative committee in Xew Jersey the other day, 
and when I said, " Mr. Hornaday, did you ever nee an automatic 
gun? "" he said "No: I never did." I said, "Did you ever see one 
shot ^ " to which, of course, ho said "No." But, nevertheless, Mr. 
Hornaday went before that committee and strongly opposed it, when 
he had never seen an automatic gun. And now Mr. Shields quotes to 
yon from Mr. Hornaday here. 

I want to say to you that we use the word " automatic " simply as a 
trade-mark, sim])ly to designate it as different from the Winchester 
pnmp gun, and the Remington guns, as a gun which we have just put 
upon the market. I want to say to yoit that this gun is absolutely 
under the control of the operator at all times. It is imjiossible to dis- 
charge a sliot from this gun without pulling the trigger. 

Another thing that Mr. Shields cites to yon is the punt and swivel gun, 
which is a gun loaded with an excessive amount of powder and a very 
heavy load of shot, and yon have to rest it upon something, as you can 
not hold it up ; you turn loose into a flock of birds with that ; you can 



7idt 

2(i AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 

not tell what it is going to Jo; you may kill only ona of them, and 
you may kill all of them. But with the automatic gun we make but 
the one size of bore. He speaks of the 10-gauge gun and the 8-gauge 
gun. We make nothing but the 12-gauge, one of the smallest size 
used by sportsmen. It can not be loaded with anything but a certain 
amount of ammunition. It can not be utilized in killing song and 
insectiverous birds, for the reason that the load is such that it woidd 
blow that little bird clear out of existence. 

He cites you to the Boone and Crockett Club and other clubs of 
New York, composed of men who are willing and aide to own their 
own preserves and do own them. I was talking with a man not 
long ago, walking down the .street with him after a meeting, and I 
said to him, " Why do you oppose this automatic gun? " He said. 
•' Oh, you American manufacturers don't make anything that is fit 
to be sold or used, anyway." He said, " Take my English gun, and 
just look how fine that is; all rubbed down by hand." "But," I 
said, •' our American citizens, most of them, can not stand it to pur- 
chase that kind of a gun." He wanted an Pjiglish gun, and that 
was just the kind of a man that I would approach to unload a $700 
gun on, and they are just the people that Mr. Shields cites to you 
to-day. They Avere the people that he landed for a gold brick, 
Ijerhajjs. 

Now. in regard to the communications from the sportsmen's asso- 
ciations of this country, they have the National Game Wardens' 
convention, where each year the game wardens from each State in 
the United States meet. ' They convened in St. Paul on the 24th and 
25th of January this year. There were 21 States and Territories 
represented by the game wardens and commissioners of tliose States 
and Territories. Mr. Shields and I Avere present together. Mr. 
Shields had with him a resolution which would indorse a bill of the 
character of this which is here to-day. That l-esolution never got 
any consideration whatever from that association. They said that 
the way to ^^I'otect game was to limit the bag and protect game 
except in the prescribed seasons, and if you wanted to propagate 
game put a residence tax on sportsmen which will place a sufficient 
amount of money in the treasury, which will enable them to go on 
and reproduce in those States where the game has been depleted. 
That was in this organization that I speak of. 

I have a copy of a resolution introduced in the New Jersey State 
Sportsmen's Association, the original copy, which they gave to me, 
and I have it here, and that opposes this legislation and says that it is 
wrong and in the wrong direction, and that it is not the way to pro- 
tect game, and is an injustice to the sportsmen of this country, be- 
cause if you limit the bag it makes no difference to that poor suffering 
bird whether he is killed with an automatic gun or a muzzle-loader. 
It makes no difference to the Territories and States. If we limit 
the bag to 20 birds, it makes no difference whether a man goes out 
and kills them with a bow and arrow or with an automatic gun. 

This name " antomatic gun " is simply a trade-mark. Mr. BroAvn- 
ing is here to-day. and if you desire to see the action of this gun we 
will be Aery glad to demonstrate it to you. Mr. Browning is also 
the iiiA-entor of the Colt automatic riot gun, which fires 500 shots a 
minute. That is an automatic gun, because all you have to do is to 
hold the trisTfifer back, and that gun continues to shoot as long as 



AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 27 

yoii hold the . trigger. But this automatic shotgun is absolutely 
under the control of the operator at all times. 

I have here a short communication addressed to me from the game 
^Yarden of the State of Ohio, which I would like to read to show you 
that this gun is not in the hands of the pot himters or the so-called 
game hogs. This reads : 

State of Ohio Fish and Game Commission. 

Columhus. Ohio, Fchruary 16. 1906. 
Mr. Tom A. Marshall. 

■^13 Broaduav- yetc York. 

My Dear Mr. Marshall : I am iu receipt of yours of the 14th instant, inquir- 
ing as to our observation ami experience with an automatic and repeating shot- 
gun. Out of many liundretls of guns that our wardens have siezed from jioach- 
ers in the State of Oliio, we never have so far secured an automatic shotgun. 
By careful reference to records, we find that the wardens have only secured from 
tour to five repeating shotguns out of every hundred seized. This proves to me 
conclusively that neither of these guns are in the hands of the poacher and 
game hog. as a rule. It is a fact that if all the hunters iu this State were com- 
pelled to use the repeating or automatic shotgun instead of the guns of their 
choice, they would kill less game than is killed to-day by using such giuis As they 
.':re familiar with. 

In regard to the protection of game, I have expressed myself in an article 
addressed to the National Game Wardens" Association, at St. Paul, that no 
amount of prohibitory or gun legislation will ever result in again restocking this 
State with game birds; that the physical conditions of our country are such 
that it is impossible to expect such legislation to remedy it. If there is any legis- 
lation that will remedy present conditions, limit the bag jier diem, number found 
m possession, prohibit sale and cold storage, and provide a suitable home that 
will afford protection from their natural enemies and inclemency of the weather. 
Tours, very truly, 

J. C. PORTERFIELD. Chief Wuiileii. 

The Chairman. What is Mr. Porterfield's position? 

Mr. Mabshali,. He is the State game warden. Wlien a man goes 
before the nationisl game wardens of the United States, who discuss 
and rehash and weigh these matters up. and they absolntely refuse 
to take any action in regard to this matter, claiming and stating that 
it is the wrong way to protect game, why should he come to j'ou 
peojjle and ask you to drop into the Territories and enact this 
legislation. Avhen he was the father of 35 bills that were introduced 
last year, some two or three in a State, and not one of those bills 
became a law ? The States turned it down, and now he comes here and 
asks you to "' rake his chestnuts out of the fire " by slipping the 
Territories in — this to make capital for him, to obtain contributions. 
We say that this is wrong, and we ask you simply to leave the matter 
as it stands. 

STATEMENT OF MR. MATHEW S. BROWNING. 

The Chairman. Mr. Brow"ning, where is your residence? 

Mr. Browning. Ogden. Utah. 

The Chairman. And what is your occupation? 

Mr. Browning. I am in the patent business, the inventing of fire- 
arms. This is the automatic shotgun. The gun is operated by the 
recoil, and consequently I can not demonstrate it to you, as Mr. 
^rarshall has said, for it requires that a cartridge be fired in order to 
throw the action back. I can show you how it does throw it back. 
^ATien the gun is fired this is thrown back in this manner [indicating]. 



710 

5J8 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUX. 

whicli compresses a spring so that if it had a cartridge in the maga- 
zine it would take that cartridge from the magazine and put it in the 
barrel [indicating]. 

Tliere are 4 cartridges in the magazine and 1 in the barrel, which 
makes it a 5-shot repeater. The gun can be fired as rapidly as a 
person can pull and release the trigger. The action is the same 
as it is in four other magazine shotguns that are now on the market. 
Yon hold the trigger, with those guns, while with the left hand you 
operate the slide: and it fires as quickly as it is closed. This slide 
<'an be operated on the repeater about as fast as the trigger of the 
automatic gun can be pulled, so the repeater can be fired about as fast 
as the automatic. But if yon fire this gun as rapidly as you can, or if 
you fire the repeating gun as rapidly as you can, or the double gun, 
for that matter, it will be at the expense of accuracy, and you will 
hit nothing if you shoot any of them as fast as you can. 

Now, as to the killing of song and insectiverous birds with this 
gun, there never was a gun made that was less adapted for that pur- 
pose. ■ It requires a good ordinary load — a good game load — to 
throw this action back [indicating]. If it is thrown back like that 
[indicating] it does not operate. It must be thrown completely back 
in order to operate. The cartridge that is used almost entireh' in 
shooting these small birds will not operate this mechanism at all. 
The automatic principle — the automatic loading — limits the gun to 
a narrow margin in cartridges. In automatic rifles and laistols a 
difference of one grain will either make the arm fail to operate or 
make the parts hit so hard that they are not long lived. The maxi- 
mum load for this gun is 3^ drams and the minimum load is 3 drams. 
There are many who say to me: "Yon can not kill ducks with 3^ 
drams.'" On the other hand, none of them would say that 3 drams 
was a bird load. This gun must be for the intelligent sportsman, the 
progressive^sportsman, who is willing to use an ordinary load, and 
knows how to take care of the arm. There is a friction piece here 
that must be kept in about a certain condition in order to have the 
arm work properly. 

The CiiAiRMAX. What is the weight of that gun? 

Mr. Browxing. About 7i pounds. 

Mr. BovEE. A^Tiat is the price of it? 

Mr. Browning. Not less than $30. The cheapest gun is $30. This 
gun is over $100. That reminds me that in cliscussing this matter 
with Mr. Hornaday I did inform him that there were over 350,000 
guns costing from $3 to $.5 placed on this market yearly. There are 
about 10,000 of these automatic guns placed on the market in a year. 
Of nil the guns that are placed on this market, four-fifths of them 
are sold for less than $12. It is not the gun that the sportsman 
buys that is destroying the game. It is the cheap gun that goes 
into the hands of the boy. and of the negro, and of the foreign 
laborer. The Latin races are especially destructive on the small 
birds, as they are known as a delicacy with them in their own country. 

The Chairman. Gentlemen of the committee, do you desire to hear 
any further testimony in connection with this bill? Are there any 
other gentlemen who desire to be heard in relation to this bill? 

Mr. Kai.anianaole. I would like to ask that Mr. McClellan be 
heard brieflv. as the Territor* of Hawaii would be included in the 
operation of this bill. 



AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 29 

STATEMENT OF MR. G. B. McCLELLAN, OF HAWAII. 

Mr. McCi.Ki.i.AX. I >i!nplY waui to ^ay that n ]irotest has been 
received froiii citizens in the Terrilory of Hawaii against the passage 
of this bill. Our people take the groiuul tliat we are entireh- alile to 
legislate on these matters ourselves in our local legislature, and there 
is no apparent reason why any such restriction should be placed upon 
the Territory of Hawaii: and if it becomes apparent or necessary 
that there shoidd be such restriction, the legishitiu'e is am[)Iy able, 
through the autliority that you have already given it. to pass such 
legislation as is necessary. I simply, on belialf of the citizens who 
have spoken in this matter, desire to protest against the passage of 
any such measure, taking away our right of local legislation, which 
you have already given us. 

Mr. BovEE. May I be permitted to enlighten the committee in re- 
spect to one matter ? I think that the committee ought to know that 
Mr. Marshall is a shooter of some reputation and experience. He was 
captain of the American international shotgun team that went abroad 
and cleaned out all the foreign teams. I do not remember the year, 
but you will see the medal which hangs from his watch chain. He, 
as a professional shooter, used a shotgun. I do not know what kind, 
but a double-barreled shotgun; and as a sportsman and cajstain of 
the great American international team he comes before this commit- 
tee and says what he does. 

ADDITIONAL STATEMENT OF MR. G. 0. SHIELDS. 

Mr. Shields. I only want two or three minutes, Mr. Chairman, to 
answer some new points that have been brought up. I want to say 
that if the sale of the automatic and pump guns could be limited to 
decent sportsmen we would make no objection to them. We want to 
keep them out of the hands of market hunters. They are the men 
who will have these guns as soon as they can get them. Thej' are now 
almost all using repeating shotguns. We are doing aAvay with the 
market hunters as fast as we can, and have been struggling with that 
problem for the last ten years. 

Mr. Browning. If you did, this objection would not be pertinent. 

Mr. Shields. On the other hand, there is no objection to the use of 
these guns at the trap. We do not undertake to ask j'ou to stop the 
maiuifacture and sale of them at all. It is only the use of them in 
hunting birds that we seek to prevent. If the makers of this and the 
pumjD ginis shall decide by and by, as they have already considered 
the necessity of deciding, to cut down the magazine to hold only one 
cartridge, so as to put the gun on a level with the double-barreled 
shotgun, then all shooters will be on a fair footing. We claim that 
two shots is enough for any man to have in his gun at any one time. 

O 



718 



m 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



002 903 246 4 < 



